Quote:
Originally Posted by JinnKai
That's where I disagree. I don't think there's anything wrong with prejudice.
There's a big difference between prejudice, which is pre-judging someone or something based on an arbitrary characteristic, and discrimination, which actually disadvantages those being prejudged. These words are used so interchangeably tbat you could likely find definitions for each that overlapped each other, but there is a distinction for me between believing certain types of things and people will follow predictable patterns based on previous experiences with those types of things or people (natural human behavior), and discrimination, which is using that belief in such a way that it hurts someone else.
To build a case that this is not just prejudice (which I think is okay) and actual discrimination, you'd have to demonstrate disadvantage.
|
And that is probably why we disagree n the superficial argument.
We look at what prejudice is in differing ways.
One can prejudge someone or something based on an arbitrary characteristic and give more rights/liberties/leeway/etc to the group they favor and not think it derogatory or wrong. But in the end it is.
That can lead to the underbelly argument.
How can one say it is ok for the black judge to do this but not a white judge?
What would the difference be?
Why are you giving one group a pass but not another?
It may seem trivial, but if you do not stop it in the trivial stages.... it can grow to be a huge problem.
I believe this is a huge problem in this country right now. That we are allowing groups to do things we wouldn't allow others to do because we don't want to look like we're prejudiced.
We are on the road from one extreme and seem to be passing the point where positive solutions can be had to another extreme that is just as wrong and as detrimental and evil as the one we came from.